AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

I ' ---------------------------------:'

I  AlC

.'---------------1

1; --G ------ -- ·1·--

'	''

-PERSOAL APPEARANCE

I!. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·

x

I	RECORD    REVIEW

....

······

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

YES	No
x

..)••··	.·.•.   Xi	iVOTE <ilFTHEB<JJtRD .      i

.
,i.

f-'

µ

MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC   I	OTHER	DENY
---------------------------------------	x
x x x
x

----------------------------------------	.

ISSUES

A93.01

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

...·.·   '<·>i•i	EHIBITS'SlJBMI'ltrED       To;l'.HE   BOARD	I

A94.05	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR  REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL  EXHIBITS  SUBMITTED AT TIME OF	I
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 Aug 2006	FD-2005-00482
i!ii'Pq!iM:NT'S ISSI,$ AND.,'l!HE 'QOARP'irDEClSlONAL;llATlQNAL AR1''DiSCIJ$SED ON.Tiffi ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVUlWBOARJ:l DECISIONAI;•RATlONAL§	.. ··
.···	.  i\(
Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

.§l_t{.N	.9.l!t;;<;;Q!l!?      - _  _  _  • -----='- .......-<.7••••••••••••••••••• LfilG. Jt   1.:IJ.l!F:.9.f.l!.Q1     a§!Qjij'f _  •••••••••••••••••••••••••
!' '''
"\§)'·   -.,,,,	' INDQ).lSEMENT ..;	DATE:  812812006
TO:	--PROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF IBE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

I535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR

RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
II
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00482	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He was discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for minor disciplinary infractions after 10 months, 26 days of active duty service. The applicant requests upgrade of his discharge in order to improve his chances of employment upon graduation from ITT Technical Institute.  The records indicated the applicant received three Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling, and placement on the Control Roster for misconduct. His Letters of Reprimand were for reckless driving; failure to go; and for operating a POC off a maintained road, being argumentative with a police officer and wearing an earring.  He was also counseled on two separate occasions for failure to go and receipt of a citation for illegal parking.  The DRB opined that
through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and is currently emolled at ITT Technical Institute.  However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

Issue 3.  Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 19 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong.  The·Board opined the applicant was older  than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.
The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

Ifhe can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board.  Ifhe should choose to exercise his right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual
evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.

CONCLUSIONS:   The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.	

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief